Turbo charged arms race

The game seems to have shifted from strategy and tactics as it was in COH, towards fast clicking micro play and bunch of OP units/combos that rule for short periods of time for both factions in COH2.

Now in COH days, people who were not that great with micro/or fast clicking multitasking could combat that with clever use of their units in strategic/tactical ways. (and the rest of us turned to those means when the plan didn't go 'by the book')

Clever use of tank traps, bunkers, barbed wire, mines and variety of 'customizable' multy-role units on both sides enabled players to slug it out with people who were superior in fast paced game.

For example: Rangers and Grens could always be turned into potent anti-infantry units with upgrade. Puma and M8 could be turned into more effective AT unit as game progresses. Lost the fuel battle? well tank traps and AT guns could always give you a chance to come back with support from AT infantry capabilities.
You could always turn your Airborne unit into potent anti-infantry unit with drop of supplies, taking advantage of strategic opportunity.

That is why we had a lot of decent players with Wehrmacht and USA that were absolutely terrible with PE or Brits.

I feel that COH 2, compared to COH, has turned from game with a lot of strategic/tactical options into a game that is just an arms race.
One unit is hard counter to pretty much everything on the field and 2 min later is just about obsolete unit and liability to the owner.

The game has become full of hard counter units that are useless vs anything else. Way to much emphasis on quickly exploiting OP unit in its short window of dominance and then racing towards next one, while trying to avoid opponents OP unit at that moment.

In my opinion, COH2 should shift back more towards multi-role units.
For example: being able to upgrade shock troops with AT weapon while losing anti-infantry capability. Rifle Guards with weapon that can hurt P4, instead of putting so much emphasis on synergy and combining troops to combat single unit.

Giving HMG weapons AP capability to combat armored vehicles, AT guns to gain AP capabilities. Tank traps, Bunkers for Soviets as well, being able to upgrade PG squad with better anti-infantry if need be. etc..

I think these things would go long way to make game more enjoyable for wider variety of gamers and bring back feel of strategy, tactics and out-thinking your opponent not just out-clicking.

In COH days, I have been defeated by players when I was certain of victory, with what can only be called, ingenious tactical use of units they had available to them.

I cannot expect to see that now, due to lack of 'customizable' units, tank traps and units being effectively only hard counters to specific units.

I can be expected to be defeated/win games by super powerful call-in units/abilities or hard-counter unit being late, but that is more frustrating than something enjoyable.

This is somewhat less noticeable in 1v1 games, but 2v2 and up it gets multiplayed even more so.

P.S. If you disagree or wish to add, please do so, but keep in mind context of my opinion instead of picking on specific points. I am aware that adding AP to HMG's would impact on balance, etc.. Do not take it literally, only as how it would change overall feel of the game

The game seems to have shifted from strategy and tactics towards fast clicking micro play and bunch of OP units/combos that rule for short periods of time for both factions.

I just want to point out that the game has improved in that regard. Since they patched the game to buff the t34 and nerf the mg the game has taken a better direction towards what you describe.

Now we have less m3/sniper/su85/mg42/222 microing and more conscript flaking + combined arms. If they could just nerf the lmg to reduce spamming grens that would be really great.

But yes I agree overall tecking is too fast/effective in this game.


PS. I am so glad there is less mines no tank traps in coh2

I just want to point out that the game has improved in that regard. Since they patched the game to buff the t34 and nerf the mg the game has taken a better direction towards what you describe.

Now we have less m3/sniper/su85/mg42/222 microing and more conscript flaking + combined arms. If they could just nerf the lmg to reduce spamming grens that would be really great.

But yes I agree overall tecking is too fast/effective in this game.


PS. I am so glad there is less mines no tank traps in coh2

yup, I meant to say compared to COH, will edit

Yeah, I wasn't huge fan of mines disabling engines on every corner and units blowing up left right and center, but more used it as point of being able to be more resourceful and having different options with same units.... T traps, I thought were quite good tactical feature (bar SE traps, that was way overboard)

COH was by no means perfect, as you know yourself. But had some nice fluidity that I feel is missing in COH2

Setting the upgrades aside.

Since they dumped the damagetables in favor of a simpler model I think this balance could be harder to achieve. A unit that was a hardcounter to one thing could at the same time be horrible against others. Jeeps are a perfect example. They did more damage to snipers than to regular infantry. This also led to rewarding infantry flanking weaponcrews. Also bikepushing infantry (lame imo) and the possibility to kite infantry easier also did alot to this. Right now, kiting cons/grens/osttruppen is doable, but hard since the nades and fausts are homing and cant be interrupted. Cover was very diffrent as well, and diffrent types of buildings provided diffrent amount of cover.

Just to name a few other things that add to simplify the game and giving it more of an armsrace feel.

I just want to point out that the MG42 has an anti-armor ability, Incendiary Armor Piercing Rounds. I don't know how effective it is against anything bigger than a T-70, but it does already exist!

Also, Panzergrenadiers can be upgraded with G43s. So that also already exists. Again, if you want to talk about the effectiveness of the upgrades, that's a different story.

Oh yeah, and the Zis gun has an artillery barrage ability, which is good against infantry.

I think some of the suggestions you made would make the units in the game too same-y for my tastes. I like that units like Shock Troops have a specialized role (ie kill everything with legs; die horribly to anything without legs).
As for generalist units, that's basically what Grenadiers and Conscripts are for. Panzergrenadiers and Guards, too, but to a lesser degree.

Oh, and please, please no more defensive structures. (Although the Soviet barbed wire field from the beta was kind of interesting)

CoH2 probably never be as perfect as CoH1, sadly

I just want to point out that the MG42 has an anti-armor ability, Incendiary Armor Piercing Rounds. I don't know how effective it is against anything bigger than a T-70, but it does already exist!

Also, Panzergrenadiers can be upgraded with G43s. So that also already exists. Again, if you want to talk about the effectiveness of the upgrades, that's a different story.

Oh yeah, and the Zis gun has an artillery barrage ability, which is good against infantry.

I think some of the suggestions you made would make the units in the game too same-y for my tastes. I like that units like Shock Troops have a specialized role (ie kill everything with legs; die horribly to anything without legs).
As for generalist units, that's basically what Grenadiers and Conscripts are for. Panzergrenadiers and Guards, too, but to a lesser degree.

Oh, and please, please no more defensive structures. (Although the Soviet barbed wire field from the beta was kind of interesting)

Ok, so we have missed the point a bit

P.S. If you disagree or wish to add, please do so, but keep in mind context of my opinion instead of picking on specific points. I am aware that adding AP to HMG's would impact on balance, etc.. Do not take it literally, only as how it would change overall feel of the game

You obviously like, fast paced teching and units that wipe everything of the field, and that is fine.
I personally don't

P.S. all those things you mentioned are either ineffective or doctrinal abilities that don't do anything to rock/scissors/paper feel of the game for me....


For me its more please no more 12 different kinds of mortar, airstrikes that kill everything in half map radius for half hour and can't wait for a DLC with Rambo and Chuck Norris (one man army that shoots tanks with arrows)
But hey, we all like different things..........

CoH2 probably never be as perfect as CoH1, sadly

Perfect is a matter of taste. I did like some of the features in CoH1 more (damagetables for one thing. But a nightmare to balance, so not perfect) but I enjoy playing coh2 more overall. Some compromises are bad, some are really good. Perhaps not for competetive 1v1, but Im far from playing that anyway (and much of the playerbase as well).

Unfortunately a lot of that flavor is impossible to achieve without the complex target tables that were unique to COH. The jeep/biking doing extra damage vs snipers was a prime example, one of the other most important ones was elite armor units taking extra flame damage, making flamers actually more powerful late game or against the OF factions. Bikes and jeeps got avoidance bonuses vs. AT guns making them useful for scouting too.

For me its more please no more 12 different kinds of mortar, airstrikes that kill everything in half map radius for half hour and can't wait for a DLC with Rambo and Chuck Norris (one man army that shoots tanks with arrows)
But hey, we all like different things..........

+1

I just want to point out that the MG42 has an anti-armor ability, Incendiary Armor Piercing Rounds. I don't know how effective it is against anything bigger than a T-70, but it does already exist!

The only problem with it is, that it was given to the german side. It should have been the soviets. The germans rarely need it, but the soviets all the time.

CoH2 probably never be as perfect as CoH1, sadly

lol. how can you say that with the game beeing 4 months old?